Just Posted: Pentax K-5 II / K-5 IIS Review

Offering a high-dynamic-range CMOS sensor, a unique shake reduction system, and a rugged weatherproof body, the Pentax K-5 II and K-5 IIS are designed for the photographer who likes to get away from the crowd. We spent a little time comparing both cameras, and though we found them quite similar to their predecessors, that didn't keep us from exploring the various features, as well as the differences between the two models. The K-5 IIS, in particular, is designed to capture more detail thanks to its lack of an anti-aliasing filter, but there are pitfalls associated with that extra detail, which we explore in greater depth.

@taktak91:Both brands have very strong lenses. Pentax primes are smaller, but mostly use slotted drive AF, which creates a moderate degree of noise. Nikon primes are significantly bigger and mostly use completely silent "Silent Wave" AF. The best place to compare lenses across system is: http://www.photozone.de/

Shawn can answer this if he wants, but I just wanted to add this to the conversation. The d7100 is obviously one of the k5II's main competitors. How is it possible that the d7100 scores a 13/14 for value while the k5II scores a 10/14? The k5II is currently $800 while the d7100 is $1200. That is 2/3 the price! Also the d7100 scores a 9/14 for performance while the k5II scores a 7/14, yet the K5II performs better in low light, has a faster burst, and a much larger shot buffer. I am not saying that the k5II is the better camera, but it seems like these two categories should be a little closer.

The sweet spot indeed is K5II for 800 USD versus D7100 for 1200 USD. In my experience the in body shake reduction more than offsets in image quality the jump from 16 MP to 24 MP. Especially when considering that most lenses in the Nikon product line do not resolve even close to 24 MP ( I am suspecting same goes in Pentax lens line, but good they do not have the 24 MP sensor :-) )

could you please explain why "in-body image stabilization" is not listed as one of the "Pros"? Is that feature counted towards the K-5 II score at all?

I know that many, many Pentaxians made a decision for Pentax because of this feature.

Given that every reader of your reviews must make up their mind anyhow whether a "Pro" or "Con" really applies to them, would it not be in the best interest of your readers to be given the chance to check whether they feel it is a "Pro" or not?

You know as well as I do that the majority of readers skips to the "Conclusions" page directly and just skim through the "Pros" and "Cons" and then compare the numerical score to other cameras. I've written reviews myself and have the Google Analytics numbers to prove that.

I'm afraid that for many users of your site, generous comments and praise for a camera somewhere in the review will not repair any damage any inadequate summary will cause.

@ Kapten Kadok ( Movie Button )For people shooting planned Video, lack of Movie Button is irrelevant. For who shoots Video on the Street or Family, where default is still but want to catch the serendipitous moment on movie when it unfolds, the lack of the Movie Button make you miss this shot. So it is indeed a con. I agree with you assessment that it is less of a con than Shake Reduction is big Pros. Shawn has fixed this. I agree all your assessment, but could you write more friendly ?

@ fisherman_lolYou are shooting yourself into the foot! You are actually the master of dpr together with every single reader. dpReview's focus on which camera receives a high priority is based on how many clicks a review receives. So go out and spread the word for more people to read Reviews on Pentax. And you can see you have been mistaken. Shawn added SR to the review. I believe an apology is in order!

In addition to lack of in-body stabilization and a bulky size for an APSC camera, the D7100 also loses to the K5 II in low light performance that is important to most photographers. So the D7100 got a score of 85 because it have two card slots, more megapixels and a movie button?

@ aviceananwThe 7100 has the 24 MP going for them. Personally to me, this is a con and not a pros, due to larger file size, slower shot to shot rate, shorter burst buffer and most importantly, it is likely it uses that 24 MP sensor from Sony which paired with wide angle lenses has actually less resolution in the image as the same lens with 16 MP sensor.

But dpreview is unfortunately very, very heavy on Resolution and much less considerate to handling. And frankly, so are most of it's readers.

So considering this weighting, the dpReview score is consistent.

I think what the community needs to do is show more that in these days handling is way more important than minute details in sensors. Handling makes the difference if you get the shot or not. All DSLR today have a good enough sensor. So I think the blame of this weighting should also go to the readers of dpReview who focus so much on resolution.

And please note that Shawn weighted handling already more than others on dpreview.

the D7100 uses a Toshiba sensor, not the 24MP Sony sensor from the NEX-7.

Whether 24MP are better than 16MP is for every reader to decide. For some it is an advantage, for some a disadvantage.

I agree with you that there is little point to moan about the weighting used to obtain the overall percentage. This is for DPReview to decide and any self-respecting reader would not just go by the overall score on its own anyhow.

However, when the subscores are wrong with respect to inter camera comparisons, this is not a matter of a DPReview choice. This is a matter of fairness.

Say the K-5 II wins in terms of "build-quality" (as it should, but doesn't) and wins in terms of "value" (as it should, but doesn't), etc. Let's say it wins on almost all scores but still comes out with a lower overall score. That's OK, AFAIC.

But the subscores must make sense in comparison to other models in the same class so that readers can make informed decisions based on correct data.

@ Hubert, Did he change the final score? NO! Is he going to consider does points made by the above poster Scunnig14? I don’t think so because it will have an effect on the final score. BTW your cheque will be in the mail , I guess. :-)

Would it at all be possible for you to also respond to a few questions raised in the thread you started (http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3498186)?

I do not understand how you defend your review scores by questioning how a "Gold award" cannot be enough. Even Nikon fans would not agree to your scoring on "build quality" and other features.

I'm very surprised that you seem to argue that it does not matter whether the D7100 or the K-5 II comes out ahead with 5% more. I'd bet my bottom dollar that a nuance like that directly translates into camera sales.

I feel you are not living up to your responsibility as a leading review site if you leave the current unjustified scoring in place and seriously claim that the K-5 II needs tape over its SD card door.

I would be extremely delighted to be hearing from you in the thread you have started (see above).

I very much agree and share your passion for the Pentax Camera Body, and I might add and you might have meant it: The brilliant User Interface / Firmware.

Would you be interested to work together on writing a very different kind of camera review ? It is not about Megapixel, resolution or any of that stuff. It is about how the Pentax camera inspires joy in photography. How it increase quality of your output, not in megapixels, but in such ineffable qualities as composition and creativity, which only can be measured indirectly, as in how many people actually like your pictures. ( They never care megapixel and RAW sharpness, they always care what you shoot and how ).

The K30 and K5 have a magic quality which seems to escape traditional reviews. I am passionate about capturing this quality and make it visible to others. Would you be interested in working together ?

I needed to update my trusted *ist DS. By chance I started shooting with my Pentax lenses on a Sony NEX-5 and LCD viewfinder. I fell in love with it. So next thing I checked reviews on Pentax Model in terms of Live View. They all came out bad. Live View not responsive, PDAF too slow, focus peaking is there but not well. Sony cameras came out great in Live View. In the end I bought a K-30 over NEX-6 in a 51:49 decision. After I started using my K-30 I got very, very angry. The K-30 is simply brilliant. Now that I have shot NEX-5 and K-30 side by side for a month my decision is 90:10 of K-30 over NEX-6.

The K-30 has a quality of customization ability to suit my shooting style which makes a HUGE difference. This quality was amiss in any of the reviews I have ever read. And live view is not bad at all, and I found focus peaking @ f/2 is useless anyways ( also on the Sony ). Instead Pentax has different yet important Live View features.

I feel very strongly that for people who like shooting creatively, the Pentax System has a quality to help the creative process, which is standing out compared to other camera systems. I like to find a way to capture this quality and make it transparent to fellow photographers. I am curious to know if anybody would like to join this project ?

1) I have a K-30, maybe somebody can add the K5 part?

2) How about if I write the Article here in dpReview and anything missing or not agreeable can be posted as comment and I re-write the Article accordingly ?

I admire your passion for Pentax HubertChen! I look forward to reading anything you write about the K5. I own a Pentax K-R from a couple years back that I still love! Right now, I am shooting with the K-01 which is such an underrated and awesome brick of a camera!!! Lots of fun. I want to purchase either a K-5IIs in the coming days or I might go a whole other way and buy a Pentax Q with all the lenses and just get back to having fun with photography. All this caring about pixels counts and minor differences in this and that is bogging me down. Again, I look forward to seeing what you might put out there, especially about the K-5. Thanks!

Thanks for your comment. In your case you want to strongly consider the K-30 and not the K-5! All the K-01 goodness and fun of Live View enhancements are present in the K-30, but not present in the K5. Plus all the K-5 User Interface greatness is present in the K-30. In short K-30 is the combination of the best features of K-01 + K5.

If you enjoyed the K-01, you will be in for a treat with the K-30 and its Dual Dials married with TAV Mode. The grip will also add to your comfort.

I will be writing about the K-30 , as this is the camera I have. I am looking for somebody to write about the difference to the K5.

Once my first draft is out, I will announce it here. But it could be a month or two. I first want to really put the camera through its paces before writing about it.

Quick question: Did you checked the HDMI output quality of the K01 ? Is it true 1080p ? I have the Sony NEX-5. It outputs 1080p signal, but the image is so soft, it can be no more than 480p. How is K01?

I've recently purchased a K01 with the 40mm DA XS pancake lens. The purchase came after 3 years of shooting with my beloved K200D, which now has over 35,000 actuations. I have used it in snow, sleet, and rain.The k200D was AHEAD of its time, and therefore Pentax literally dropped the ball on the camera and had to discontinue it. I will not part with this 5 year old camera because I have compared the images from k01 with the k200d and although I noticed some improvement in detail, most importantly High ISO noise control, the overall difference is minimal.

I applaud Pentax for majorly updating the K200D, because this is essentially what the k30 is, minus the top LCD screen. :)

But, why did I buy a K01? Simply put, you can not get a body + pancake lens combo for $339 :-)This camera has a lot of quirks, and it definitely was not worth it's original price of $749. -One does not have full manual control with M42 lens-Sound gain level is too prominent when recording.

-It does not record +30Mbps (some blocky artifacts + jello effects)-Digital SR crops sensor during recording -Can not output true HD on monitor, one can only use VGA connection to output live recording to monitor.

Granted, all the negatives are only on video mode which can easily be solved with minor tweaks and cheap DIY hacks.The K01 excels in stills, there have actually been some comparison between the K5 and k01, which most members in pentax forum speculating the K01 images look "sharper" because it has a much thinner anti aliasing than the k5.

Thank you so much for answering my question if the K01 would output true 1080p live. If it would have, we would have bought a few to use them in IQC in our production line. The K-30 also only can output live VGA.

I was flirting with the idea of buying the K01 for some time, but then the K-30 body dropped to < 500 USD and this is the way I went. I do not regret it as the Dual Dial is what I use for every shot. You have a point about the price. I will think about it if this is the camera for my son. He just inherited the *istDS and is quite jealous about the LCD viewfinder / live view workflow.

I think Pentax made a mistake not to bundle this camera with a nicely engineered low profile LCD viewfinder with diopter adjustment. This is really transforming shooting experience. As for the Jello Artifacts, either pan slower or try Adobe After Effects. It has claimed to remove Jellow. For myself slower panning is doing the trick.

An awesome review of an awesome camera, even if the market is now flooded with new ones (D600, D5200, D7100, 6D) the K5II/s is a relevant camera and is heads above shoulders even if a comprehensive review came so many months after the release.

1. Awesome build quality. K-5 is Stainless Steel chassis covered with a Magnesium Alloy shell and weather sealed. K-01, whilst not being WR, is made from Aluminium and feels like quality in the hand. Especially with a LTD lens attached.

2. Better ergonomics (i.e ISO button in the 'right' place for one thing and GREEN button) so you can shoot them with one hand tied behind your back. Raw/FX button is also programable for instant access to certain features.

7. Focus Confirmation beep AND illuminated Focus Point in field of View of VF (unlike my D800E which has that rangefinder display at the bottom of the screen thus requiring eyes to look away from the subject and no beep when a manual focus lens is connected).

12. Hardware buttons for all major regular functions accessible via the thumb or a real switch/button. e.g. K-5 has an extra position for the focus mode selector (AF-S, AF-C and AF-M modes) which are accessed via a lever in exactly the same spot as my D800E (AF and AM modes with button) only you don't need to mess around with dials after moving the lever, pressing the focus select button like the D800 (has more AF modes though). 13. K-5 Grip has ALL major controls unlike the D800E grip which requires remapping the AF button for DOF etc.

14. On/Off lever surrounding the Shutter button is also a DOF Preview button on the K-5, way better than searching for the traditionally placed button on the D800E.. made worse if you swapped the Function button and Preview button on the D800E for some reason.

15. K-5 "P" or Hyper Program Mode allows for prioritizing shooting to action by just using front or rear control dials to swap between Av or Tv modes.

19. Pentax cameras are light and small so they don't dominate you when you're out and about and for me that's a lot of the fun in itself. My D800E with grip and the 70-200 F2.8 VRII weighs a few grams under 3kg and after awhile it wears you down, even with black rapid straps etc. Even the Pentax DA*300 F4 is WR and is sharper and weighs almost 500gms less than my AF-S 300/4. Weight is an issue for me these days as I have a back injury.

20. Weather Resistant and Cold Resistant down to (-10 to -20 degrees C): With a WR lens you hardly have to think about using them in the rain or arctic conditions.

There's obviously more to it than these things and you'd have to try one to appreciate it.

I can't believe Pentax might have produced a camera worse than the last. This circumstance is rather strange in my opinion. But all this makes me think that I will stay for a long time a Pentax customer. Regards. Erino.

The following features are listed as Pros in 7100 and not in K5, but should have been listed there as well:* Effective auto white balance in a variety of lighting conditions (*1)* In-camera raw processing (*1)* Manual audio recording levels (*1)* 3.5 mm Stereo mic and headphone inputs* Ability to output uncompressed HD video to an external recorder (*1)

(*1) marked features I am not 100 % sure, someone who actually has a K5 would need to confirm. The auto white balance on my K30 sure has been impressive. It has manual audio levels, albeit with no VU meter. If the 7100 has a VU meter, than it is fair to list this one on 7100 and not on K5. ...

I also suggest two more cool feature to be listed on Pros:* If you take an important shot in JPEG mode, you still can save it as RAW as well as long as it is in buffer memory* Pentax unique TAV mode. You can set Shutter, Aperture, ISO auto range and exposure compensation. All in direct access. (*2)

I understand that both reviews have been made by different reviewers. But since it is the goal of dpReview to help its readers to make a decision which camera to buy when comparing camera reviews, everybody involved would benefit if the conclusion pages of competing models is written with a higher degree of consistency.

(*2) This is the only mode I use on any photographic situation. It is extremely fast to use and covers any contingency in creative exposure. Having only one mode make responding that much faster, as you no longer need to think which mode to choose to express what you had in mind. Instead you just adjust Tv / Av / +/- EV & ISO directly.

In such case I would suggest to list it as plus in both cameras. And maybe somebody can come up with a logical name for this new exposure mode. Makes no sense to list each vendors unique name for the same thing in a Pros list that shall be written for the intent to be easy to compare between camera models.

@2) Considering the focal length automatic automatically in exposure is very interesting. I am confused why to modify ISO according to focal length. Would it not make more sense to consider Shutter Speed ?

I'm surprised by the low comparative scores the K5 received compared to the Nikon D7100 in certain areas. The "performance" score is particularly misleading as the D7100 can only shoot 5 or 6 RAWs, while the K5ii (like its predecessor) can fire 21. (I usually get 23 RAWs).

Let's move on and stop counting pixels and features! Get out there and take some pictures instead of wasting your time bickering and whining over what feature is better than the other or what manufacturer is better than the other...If I hear one more person whine about the stupid movie button...Jesus! It's just a guide to present the features of each camera and present it in a subjective view.I'm sure all of the major camera companies are reading all of your post and taking notes! RIGHT

No I really don't care about every feature on every camera and I don't care about Canon vs. Nikon vs. Pentax vs. Whoever! I use this site and many others to compare stats when I'm buying a camera that's it. I get tired of all of the so called experts who think they know how to design cameras and what features should have been included.

I was very sad that for a long time I have not really seen a dpreview staff participate in discussions in comments. Now one reviewer did. And what happened to him?

* He is greeted with cynicism* It is suggested he is part of a conspiracy against Pentax* Bad intentions are suggested in many occasions

No surprise dpReview staff was not really present in comments and maybe after today will not be again.

I am not asking you to agree. I am asking you to write politely and accurately when you disagree. Always believe the Author has good intention and never suggest otherwise. If you believe you found a mistake or misjudgment by the Author, point it out and provide fact or reasoning why this shall be a mistake / misjudgment.

Following these rules will turn this place to be much more pleasurable and will attract more competent and more knowledgeable posters too. So you will be rewarded with more information in comments and more joy reading them

Mr Hubert, you are missing the point here: no one is angry at DPR or calling them bad names, they are not some kind of a bad regime or such. The criticism is addressed to them in order for them to try doing their namesake job.Their namesake job is DPR, not "Canon and Nikon Timely Reviews, Others .. Who Cares". Maybe they don't realise that by such a treatment of smaller brands they destroy that necessary flair for uniqueness and innovation in photography we all benefit from. Your comment does not help it; you flatter their current negligence — in lack of a better word — by clapping them for *any* kind of review — even if it's 9 months too late, for a brand they (with commitment showed so far) couldn't care less about. Say, Nikon D7100 review came out a few weeks after the announcement. K5II(s) review came out 9 months later. If you think that's OK, that such people do their job correctly, that the conclusions of too late reviews are okay and not anachronistic, then we disagree.

Thank you very much for your reply. I agree with you 100 %! I like to be specific:* It is bad for all of us that the K-5 review is 9 month late ( bad for dpreview themselves, bad for customer, bad for Pentax )* This much delayed review is hurting Pentax in sales! In return this is hurting the photography community that a company delivering excellent value cameras with outstanding user interface is not receiving the sales they probably need and there is a risk they might close one day because of it and the community will loose one of the most innovative and photographic centric vendors

In fact I wrote about this earlier, but there are many comments here. I will post my earlier writings on responsibility of reviewer for your reference.

My comment about being nice was related towards those many comments which were very cynic in style and which were suggesting malicious intent. I objected the tone and treatment. I did not objected the content.

Please consider the following as a kind request to open your mind and rethink your position on responsibility of reviews.

Here is my background. I was responsible for marketing and sales of branded products. Which brand is not relevant, but suffice to say we have been the market leader for a certain product category in central Europe. For the duration of this product line sales volume per month was directly proportional to review results in the major publications. To be more clear: Sales success was not proportional to quality and competitive fitness of our product, but was proportional to test review score. E.g. Once we introduce a new much better product and sales were bad, but the older and not as good product sold better. After the ( 9 month delayed ) review came out and the newer product scored in the new review, sales of the new product exploded and the old one finally collapsed ...

Can we not be adults and identify by name? You mean (mostly) me. The inability to candidly call out DPR for its inability to perform a timely (and to a much worse degree) accurate review is a shame and is frankly entirely warranted. Mr. Barnett's inability to admit fault (both on his behalf and on that of DPR, but moreso on himself as he is the author of this review) is what is most concerning. Mr. Chen, I appreciate your enthusiasm towards your K-30, and I concur that it is a phenomenal marvel and will argue tirelessly that it is by far the best value for the money in the photographic world today for stills photography. That notwithstanding, your ambivalence to the inability (or neglect?) of Digital Photography Review to fulfill its very own namesake detracts from the issue at hand: holding DPR accountable for inacurrate and untimely publications. And then refusing to admit fault once questioned. Enjoy your fantastic K-30, but please stop disillusioning DPR that they are "succeeding."

Delaying a great review result for 9 month does hurts the manufacturer.

I am not joining conspiracy theories here and I am not pointing fingers. I am not complaining that the review is late. dpReview is hurting everybody equally, themselves, customers and the manufacturers.

I am however referring to your answers your posted previously elsewhere. These answers are suggesting you are not aware that review results impact sales of manufacturer. They do. And a reviewer should understand this and should carry this burden of responsibility well and consciously.

I meant you indeed. But not at all you alone. Please also refer to my previous posts. But I am also specifically replying your latest one:

1) I very much agree the much delayed review of this outstanding camera is very, very bad!2) I was also upset about that he was not taking responsibility about impact on Pentax sales of delayed reviews. Thus my post about reviewer responsibility of timely reviews3) About succeeding. I meant very specifically that this author is succeeding at being responsive in these discussions. You have to admit this is an accomplishment. I was not referring that this K5 review is a full success. I also was astonished about the relatively low score.4) You still have not recognized that at least in one regards dpReview has given Pentax credit as they have not done so ( at least to my knowledge ) to any other vendor, which is the one page complete committed to outstanding Pentax feature.5) I did not objected the content of your criticism ...

Heie2 continued ...5) I did not objected the content of your criticism, but rather the tone:* with lots of cynicism* partly arrogant* suggesting malicious intentions

I believe the dpReview Author would have been much more receptive to your correct information, would you have presented it in a neutral. This would have been more pleasant for him, more pleasant for us, more pleasant for you. And maybe you would have received a response of the like you were looking for, such as he admitted you have been correct.

Instead you insulted the man and he become defensive. In such environment critical discussion becomes limited and difficult. Seldom successful.

I hope this makes more sense now.

And I want to repeat one more time, I did not meant you alone, not all. You at least stayed on topic and on facts. It was my feeling in general that comments on dpReview are mostly dark and cynic. Seldom light and enlightening. Not only for this product but on many others as well.

Great minds seem to think alike. I am just coming back from company with family dinner and was shooting some pics and clips. Lovely.

Thank you for your comment and humor! Now, with more oxygen here is my thought on your comment:

1) I have no doubt dpReview staff can speak for themselves. I am sure they can speak way better for themselves than I ever can as I am not them, and I am not a native speaker.

2) I was speaking for MYSELF.I really did not enjoyed wading through these mostly negative in tone comment. ( Please separate this from negative in content comment. I agree the criticism in content, I do not agree the negative tone. It is possible to write a disagreeing comment in a polite and agreeable tone )

3) I was also speaking for those who wrote the comments in bitter toneThey were trying to achieve a necessary change in dpReview. Or at least a first step, dpReview agreeing that the review to be 9 month late is really bad, bad , bad ...

... would have dpReview agreed to it, a lot of this negative energy would have dissipated. But due to the very negative tone of the criticism a logical debate on the subject did not happen, but rather an emotional one did. And no side recognized anything. No communication really happened. People talked at each other, but not to each other. Really sad for everybody involved: The author of the comment, the author of the Article, and those who followed reading.

I hope this makes more sense now. Let me know if you still disagree. If so where and why. I think to come to an understanding on how to communicate politely -- especially when disagreeing -- will help everybody here.

I agree entirely with everything you said, however I felt that while my tone was/is aggressive (a tendency of mine at times, I admit), it was never insulting. In the event I am in similar circumstances, I fully expect to be called incompetent/neglectful/etc should that be accurate. That isn't an insult: it's being succinct and having the maturity and integrity to call a spade a spade as opposed to focusing and prioritizing feelings over content. As you mentioned, I never deviated from the facts and presented them lucidly.

Conversely, go to the Pentax SLR Talk and in Mr. Barnett's very own thread that he started about the review being posted and see if the polite, overly respectful questions (which I am not condemning in the slightest) questioning his execution of this review have earned a response from Mr. Barnett.

You have been disrespectful, actually. Re-read your own posts. I did respond in those threads on the day the review was posted, look again. But I've been busy here lately trying to respectfully respond to you, among others.

I apologize if you felt that way, as I was merely being candid - a quality of mine I admit I am reminded is not often welcome. Regardless, if you felt insulted/disrespected, it would have behooved you to contact me directly (i.e. via pm) and state so as opposed to being so defensive.

I sincerely never intended to be insulting or disrespectful, and if I felt as such from you, I would have contacted you directly and notified you of that. I apologize for making assumptions that how I would prefer to be professionally engaged was not reciprocal to your preferences.

All of that notwithstanding, there are many issues pertaining to your review that are awaiting your attention.

I very much appreciate your reply. Thank you. But you can not call this review incompetent. It is rather very, very competent. Where you and Shawn disagree are either minute details or questions of weighting. As far as I can tell it is possible both of you would actually come to agreements rather quickly if you discussed matters relaxed. But from where I sit it looks to me that you have been disrespectful and Shawn has been defensive / resenting, which is a normal reaction. You want to convince Shawn to make a change. That is admirable. But being disrespectful is simply not helping you. Nor is it joyful for others to read. And even if you do not agree to be disrespectful, you agreed to be aggressive. ( By the way a common problem I share ). All the same. If you are aggressive, the response will be defensive, again your intent was lost in aggression.

Once more I want to show my appreciation for your engaging in replying to the comments. I would appreciate very much your replies on my posts:

a) on the matter of responsibilities of Reviewers ( see above )b) Consistency of Pros Points K5 versus D7100

I really hope you do not understand me as nagging. I very much appreciate the level of detail and accuracy of dpReviews reviews and in fact there is no any other site that comes even close to dpReview in this regards.

That being said, I believe that coming to an understanding on above topics would help dpReview to reach an even higher level and it might dissolve some of the negative energy in the comments here. I am available for personal discussions on this topic if you would like. Post me a personal message and I will respond. A phone call is in order too. I am in China Time zone. In case you are in the US, Your morning is my night. I am about to retire for tonight.

"Pentax cameras are great, but Pentax as system seriously lacks lenses. Beside several excellent primes (which still do not cover the whole range), there is literally no good zooms for the system."For Pentax-K there are about 80 different lenses in the current production line.Isn't it enough?I've got DA*16-50 and 55-300 and those are very good lenses.Why to propagate info trash?!

I searched the entire Article and could not find the statement you quoted. Could you let us know which page ?

Just in case. I have a pretty elaborate Pentax lens system. And in whichever way I want to expand, I know there is the proper lens available. So I agree your comment that the Pentax System is very complete.

The only thing I can not see doing it is professional sports photography.

If DPR didn't wait 9 months, the K5II(S) would have scored better — according to DPR's own words of balancing expectations of a camera relative to its current situation and peers.So where is the logic in that — be late to make a review for 9 months, and honour it with "today's relative value"? Someone could even think that you have waited for a new model of Nikon to come out, so that the K5II would not look as good as its newer peer, from a brand you'll always favour with timely reviews (as Simon acknowledged few weeks ago).In a way, you guys on DPR do protect Nikon's interests. You care more about Nikon. If this Pentax camera is often overlooked even if full of unique treats for photographers, to paraphrase your words from the review, you do contribute a great deal to it, by writing damn late reviews, when camera is almost to be replaced with a new model.

You're over-thinking it. It was a busy Fall filled with new cameras and many conflicting priorities. We've done the best we can. It's not a conspiracy. Both cameras got gold awards because we think they're worthy. Gold's not good enough? What difference does it make if the camera scores better? Will our score help it take better pictures? Nikon's interests? I'm pretty sure Nikon can take care of itself.

As for the K-5 II's score, it's a little lower because it didn't change much after more than two years. It isn't a contest, it's a relative judgment based on changes in the market. This review was overwhelmingly positive on a camera that's very little different from its 2010 predecessor; where are you finding offense?

"with new cameras and many conflicting priorities." That's exactly what has been said - Pentax is given the priority of red-headed stepchildren.

"As for the K-5 II's score, it's a little lower because it didn't change much after more than two years." Could it be a testament to being ahead of its time in the first place, and then having the smarts to keep what works? I hope they NEVER abandon the K-5 body. EVER.

I personally find offense to the inaccuracy of the review. The truth is, everyone goes to the conclusion page and that's it, especially those whom aren't very camera saavy. So when you artificially deflate the scores, it sends the wrong message to those not diligent to do their due research. For instance, build quality. There isn't a camera with better build quality for less than $2500. PERIOD. And even then, the K-5 can compete against the D4/1DX. Its ergonomics are without fail praised as being "as close to perfection as cameras get."

Heie2, had you read the review, you'd see statements like these: "Much as other manufacturers generally update internal components of their professional SLRs while leaving the controls untouched, Pentax focused on what needed updating in the K-5 - namely the autofocus and sensor - and left the rest alone. That leaves less to talk about in a review of this sort, but most of the camera's old tricks - dating back to the K-7 - are unique enough that they still seem new."

"As far as the number and arrangements of control points are concerned, there are no external differences whatsoever. This is good news - as far as operational handling is concerned, these cameras are quite pleasurable to use."

Heie2: And how about this gem from the first paragraph of the conclusion:

"Though they don't represent hugely significant upgrades to the original K-5, the Pentax K-5 II and K-5 IIS still hold their own in the current SLR market, with excellent image quality, solid build, and a proven interface. We appreciate the tight, simple design of the K-5 II, one that offers quick access to a rich feature-set. Where the K-5 II shines, though, is its quality sensor, which seems essentially unchanged from its predecessor."

And a little further down: "Thanks to the sensor we liked so much in the K-5 and Nikon D7000, the Pentax K-5 II still turns out excellent images with a wide dynamic range and low noise, while maintaining good shadow and highlight detail."

Features? You mentioned (albeit hastily) the sensor shifting for composition adjusting and the astro tracer (you failed to mention how cheap the O-GPS1 is for what it offers - $150 and it's yours). How about having stabilized primes under 90mm - Nikon has *none* and my Sigma 8-16mm on any Pentax is stabillized, as well as my 8mm fish eye. EIGHT MILLIMETER LENSES. How about pixel mapping that you can do by yourself and not have to send in to service for in the event you have hot pixels? But "Features" category score is high enough. For a $1000 camera...

Less than exceptional RAW image quality? Really? Considering your partnership with DXO I would have thought you'd pay attention to their measurements. I advise you look at their Number *4* camera under "Landscape." Out of 216 they've reviewed. "Dizzying heights" was their term for the K-5 II series DR.

Lastly, the D7100 seems to have better "performance." Tell that to burst mode shooters and their 7 RAW buffer...

Okay. You're obviously inconsolable. Every review has cons. Try not to take them personally. I really liked the Pentax K-5 II and K-5 IIS and strongly recommend them to fans of cameras and photography. I said so in a fairly detailed review, offering photographic evidence. If you prefer to see me as saying something else, I clearly can't change your mind.

I can understand your feeling that Pentax Cameras are very under-appreciated in the market. I just got my K-30 and the amount of additional and useful features it provides is blowing my mind. I now feel like an idiot I was even considering the Sony NEX-6 over the Pentax K-30. I am working on a Review from the perspective of an Enthusiast Photographer to hopefully make these features more visible to a broader audience. Your comments have been very useful and will make it into my review. So thank you.

May I suggest however that you notice that this review awarded the K5II the most prestigious gold award and on top of that dpreview awarded Pentax a dedicated page of "Standout Features Explored". I have not seen dpreview ever to do this for another brand!

Your language also suggest a bitterness and resentment, which usually never helps to speed up communicating what you want to say.

That being said, I appreciate the technical contents of your posts. Thank you.

I can understand your frustration, but you also have to acknowledge the reality and ask yourself why Pentax is not better treated, not just by reviewers everywhere, but also by consumers. Why are they not buying the K5 for example, with its "dizzling" high performance results, Gold Award, and high praises, like -

- There isn't a camera with better build quality for less than $2500. PERIOD. And even then, the K-5 can compete against the D4/1DX. Its ergonomics are without fail praised as being "as close to perfection as cameras get."

Why then does this camera not sell at even $799? or has to be discounted so low?

The answer is obvious. Most people or 99.9% of the system camera buyers have already given up and left Pentax for dead. Who wants to risk their money buying Pentax lenses? How can they have confidence buying if they do not know if or when an upgrade model is ever coming, if ever. With no interest from buyers/readers, why should DPR and others bother to review.

"As for the K-5 II's score, it's a little lower because it didn't change much after more than two years. "

i think the k5-2 is about as good as the D600. Better Raw Noise (review here never mentions best APS-c results, even beating Full Frame sensors)) and features, vs. 50 percent more pixels and more AF fields.

It doesnt matter if its 2 years old, its still APC-s class leader. That said, the K30 is almost as good as the K5.2 and costs ONE THIRD of the D600.

I do not agree people have given up on Pentax nor that there is any reason to? Do not forget the K-30 is reasonably new and had quite some improvements over the K5. Also please recognize Pentax has a different product cycle strategy, one which actually makes me more confident in buying Pentax. The develop longer on a camera model. Make it much better at release time than competition. Then they keep it longer in production. Due to the stronger development they are still competitive even when being in the market for 24 month. But due to keeping the product in production very long, they can enjoy cost savings, which they are so kind to pass onto us, the buyer.

So what does Pentax give me: Better thought our cameras with better handling, significantly more features and significantly less bugs in a more durable housing. And due to longer product life cycle the resale value of my equipment is also higher.

Does "changes in the market" take into consideration cameras which have release dates months/years after the camera in question (not specifically the K-5II)? Based on that approach it would seem 'reasonable' to lower ALL scores from previous reviews within the context of what is currently available and which has also been reviewed. But honestly, I've never thought that refining something was worth less than not. Gold scores may well be overdue for a Carat qualifier.

@ HubertAgree with your assessment of the Pentax systems and product lineage.I own a Kx, still a formidable sensor, when teamed up with good glass. Like the cheapo but stunning 55-300, produces great images. So much so that according to snapsort, the sensor quality still outperforms recent Canon models. Obviously other factors like processing to consider, but an entry level Pentax designed how many years ago, way ahead of the opposition on many counts at the time, still comparable, much like the K5.Pentax problem is marketing and dropping the ball at the end film days and beginning digital days. Never recovered from that, however product wise and kit lenses very good in their class, some very nice zooms and well known high quality primes.Just got to move with the times and technology.

It got a good score and a gold award. In fact, Pentax could have done more with video functionality which is ever more relevant to DSLR users and videographers. The ergonomics of the Nikon may be excellent, but perhaps the K5II should've scored higher for body strength as well. Wifi? Focus Peaking? New and not gimicky but useful features are coming out in other models. And what about the less than top notch oomph of the processor in the K5? Think of the change from Canon 5DII to 5DIII – quite an upgrade. I think that is relevant to consider. Pentax bears some responsibility for not getting those A+ points. Though their market presence and marketing are abysmal, to their credit they've stuck to their design and engineering ethos and come out with a great camera that is only slightly changed but still deserves a solid A... which it got. Be fair.

I did but it's not clear what is the AF accuracy (not just whether it can focus under low light) under tungsten light. I'm sure many Pentax -and, I'm afraid, past- DSLR users are very much interested about potential improvements in the area. Thanks for your reply.

There is no doubt the Pentax is a great DSLR body design. I think it is much better than the Nikon D7000 or D7100. But how many jumped ship from the K10D and/or K20D to Nikon over AF issues and noise control? Pentax obviously solved the noise issues, but how about AF now? With which Pentax lenses does it lag in this regard?

I am using the K-30, mostly with FA 30 mm f/2 and FA 50 mm f/1.4. These lenses are not known to be a speed demon. PDAF is blazingly fast. Hunting is a thing of the past. AF appears to be spot on. I still need to to critical AF precision testing. I am using most of time CDAF however, it is significantly slower, but still about the speed of the *istDS PDAF. But its accuracy is stunning. Let me know if this answered your question ?

As an owner of both the K-5 and K-5 II, I can testify that AF accuracy on the II in both low and artificial light is in a different league compared with the old camera. Also, for the first time on a Pentax body, I have not felt the need to AF adjust any of my lenses. Can't comment on tracking in AF-C because I tend not to use it.

No they use noise reduction only above 1600 iso (look at the noise charts). Pentax customized that sensor (optical low pass filter and color filter array) to perform better and they did a good job. I think they learned it when they used Samsung sensors before, trying to catch up with the rest on image quality.

Quote: The battery door has a tendency to open during normal operation. Taping it shut when working in wet conditions might be prudent ....

I have to say I have had the K-7 (same body as the K-5/K-5II/K-5IIs), the K-5 MKI and now the K-5II and have taken thousands of shots with each camera. The only time the battery door has opened is when I was changing the battery, not once has it done it otherwise.

Neither has the card door on mine. Over 20k pics in rainy conditions, on the beach, hot weather and the cockpit of a helicopter (my day time job) and it has never had "a tendency to open during normal operation." Either a duff one or dodgy gripping action?

I have personally owned the K-7, K-5, K-30 and K-5 IIs. Not ONCE have I *EVER* had *ANY* flap or door open without my doing so purposefully. EVER. Over the course of several years and tens of thousands of shots between them, to include combat photography and my cameras bouncing on my vest during dismounted patrols. Not. Once.

It seems like DPR is constantly on a mission to *find* faults with Pentax's cameras because there are just too few and a short con list wouldn't look good compared to the Canikon competition. I admit the C-AF is not in the same league as the competition, but other than that? I won't comment any further than has been done regarding your out-of-touch sense of reality when it comes to a video button on a STILLS camera.

Now it's my comments on the card door that are causing a problem and drawing conspiracy theories. You really are sensitive. It happened. More than once. Maybe it's how I hold the camera. Ever consider that someone else's experience might be different from yours? The camera got a GOLD award. You prefer reviews, I'm perceiving, where only good things are said about cameras you've invested in? We won't publish those about any camera because there are always cons to consider.

Look at the cons list for the last two Nikons we reviewed. There are eight cons. There are only seven in this K-5 II/IIS review. If it's a conspiracy, Nikon users have a better argument.

Last I checked, the Pentax K-5 II offers video. It is not just a stills camera. I'm personally in agreement that a movie start button isn't a deal-breaker for me, but we think it's important to say it for the sake of those for whom it would be.

Your comment about the Pentax C-AF system makes me think you're a Nikonian after all.

I prefer objectivity. I prefer integrity and competence. I am invested in Pentax well more than I ever thought I would be and than most people are. But I appreciate an honest review that gets it right. I am not afraid of criticizing my own gear and pointing out the shortfalls.

Honestly it seemed that you liked the cameras. It really did. But at the end of the day, you failed to capture that in the review scoring which is your single most important component of the entire review. Please do not blame your ineptitude on my displeasure at it.

The review is quite objective and quite positive. If you can't see that a new camera with few changes should be re-evaluated when it is reviewed again several years later, I can't convince you. Your insults are ill-aimed at someone who did his level best to judge the cameras fairly and give people good advice.

Re-evaluating a camera based on the evidence and comparing it to the current market is objectivity. Some of the scores even went up relative to the K-5, which is hard to see with the bars. You put too much importance in numerical increase, when our intent for the scores has always been stated as relative to the current market, not as judgments set in stone for all time. So your expectation that they should always go up is based on a mistaken impression. You can disagree with that, but you needn't be so concerned with it. Most people who can read will understand my words more than minor nudges in green bars in a score chart: The K-5 II is a very good camera.

Apparently it's me that doesn't get it. Apparently I am the only one that considers this imaginary Joe Average who has no idea what ISO and RAW are. This made up guy that skips to the last page of the book and bases everything he needs to know on one colorful graph as opposed to 15 pages of detailed, positive statements (in case you missed it while defending yourself "Honestly it seemed that you liked the cameras. It really did.") This guy who has no desire to read a comprehensive scoring system rubric because what more is there to know than a B-/C+ grade?

Heie2, sounds about right. For you, the score is critical. I get that. It must go up, never down. I get that too, and disagree with the notion, even as i understand your point. But you won't respond to evidence that it's a very positive review. The person you stand to defend, who reads only the bars in the score, apparently can't read the very first lines of the Overall Conclusion, which I quoted. Or the review summary, which is right in the same box as the bars.

I frankly expected to be fried by fans of other camera platforms for being so positive about the K-5 II and K-5 IIS, not by its fans.

"It must go up, never down." Please reread everything I had said. I am not looking for artificially inflating scores "just because." I am championing accuracy. I have said it multiple times that you were generally positive about the cameras, albeit not comprehensive enough and not giving due attention to many critical features in your write up. But when the overall assessment came in a non-subjective manner -- there is no way to misread and interpret a graph other than the exact way it is presented as opposed to wording and language -- and it fails to accurately represent both the camera itself and your own review, especially when compared to its main competitor (D7100), that is what I take issue with. If it was too high, I would have said so despite owning the camera myself. I can't stress enough that accuracy is my focus here. Not inflation for the sake of promotion. We have politicians and the U.S. eduation system for that ;)

This camera deserves a lot more attention than it gets. The first "real" camera I had was a Pentax ME Super that my 5th grade librarian gave me in 2000. Compact and sturdy, attributes apparently shared by the K5II.

I like that, in 2000, people were using and learning with film. I still see college kids using film and I sold my EOS Elan 7 to one, who loved it and was thrilled to be doing a retro art photo project for a class. You learn a lot about exposure when every shot cost you $$, before and after.

I would buy this camera if video was on par with Canon. In fact, I had the K-5 and sold it because of the video. I must say I didn't really appreciate the AF that was hit or miss in some specific situation. Anyway, for those who bought this camera, they're going to love the ergonomics. Canon and Nikon should learn from them. Every buttons is perfectly placed.

The K5 is a marvellous camera; these two are even better. Stop whining. Pentax builds great stuff; it's small as it can be, built like a tank, looks beautiful, and NOBODY ELSE has the limited lenses (except maybe Leica, but then, they don't have weatherproof zooms, or anything for under $3,000.00). Looking forward to the K3, and glad they're taking their time with it.

I just wish they'd build a nice 135 f2.8 again. And they need something between the 21 and the 31. And a weatherproof flash. And they should just make everything weatherproof.

Anyone else chuckle when they mention that by the time the review is out, the price has now dropped by 33%, which now makes it a great deal! I guess we Pentax users can look at this as a positive, as those unfortunate Canikons that get reviewed the week the things hit store shelves get reviewed at their launch price.

It is a great deal. Whats unfortunate is that it is marketed so poorly that the price has dropped to a point where there cannot be much profit in it for Pentax. I've always like Pentax cameras, a shooters camera and incredible build at the price point. Unfortunately, Pentax can't sell them.

The camera has programable buttons. If you want a movie button, make one a movie button. This camera has so many features, I would like to have professional assistance. The manual is easy to read,but I need more.

So in a decade from now, to avoid such reviews nuisance with "lacking this mode or that", all cameras will be video by default. And a "historicity penalty" for a manufacturer issued by some camera review site would be "doesn't have a stills button on top plate".

The standout features are truly outstanding, the "Composition Adjustment" is essentially turning every lens into a "shift" lens, although only 1.5mm on either side...Why don't Pentax offer tilt also, a 1 degree tilt is much more significant than a 1mm shift.

sadly, another camera review with horrible sample photos... i'm afraid no one pays attention to the samples anymore here on dpreview.com... back in the day, when most reviews were done by Phil Askey, the samples were so much better in terms of content and composition...

Actually, Phils reviews were never known for artistic shooting. Workman and useful come to mind. Todays images have more than enough useful information to make a informed purchasing descision, as well as some good shots.

You need to see some grainy, moody, over-processed monochrome street scene to judge the capabilities of the sensor?...

since when does a proper, old school, good composition include grain, over-processed monochrome?

i was only referring to the samples as not being well-composed... they seem to me as though they're merely hasty shots lacking in aesthetics, primarily good content, appealing subject etc... thats it... you did not have to FRY me for that.. ;)

Sorry to not meet your expectations, Mark. I take my gallery shots to demonstrate the camera's features, primarily its sensor, and I post them uncropped and unmodified. As such, I frame elements that interest me and show some detail and color. That's tougher to do here in Seattle, where sunny days are rare. In the future, don't look to our gallery shots for great art. They are demonstrations of what sensor and lens can achieve; we'll leave the art to you.

Question for the DPreview team. I don't wish to start a flame war here but I'm comparing the D5200 to the Pentax. I understand that Nikon normally produces softer images out the box which is not a problem as you can incorporate it into your workflow, but there looks like a serious problem with the Nikon images, and I'd like some clarity on whether it's the lens distortion or not. There is a radical change in softness around the edges of the 5200 compared to the Pentax. You can clearly see it on the label of the Martini bottle - top left and top right above the colour chart. It's clearly not normal - did the tripod shift, or is the kit lens to blame?

Please stop the "no movie button" nonsense this is a stills camera. I have a movie button on my camera, and guess what I disable it in the menu because you set it by accident (now I have a useless button that does nothing in stills shooting). This movie button commenting on reviews is tiresome.

Thus give to God what is for God, and to Caesar what is for Caesar. If a camera has no video function included, there is no need to put "no movie button". Just say at beginning of the test that the camera has no video function, that's it. Relate the movie button when he is in the wrong place, but not if the camera has no video function. You see, I am among those that like all the video movie functions to have remained in movie cameras only. I have now also this useless movie button on mine. I am photogtapher, and if I do video, I use specific video material.

My D7100 has a movie button. I'm a stills shooter but the movie button is still a great convenience. You don't have to use it if you consciously don't want to, but like the cup holder, it's sure as hell useful when you need it!

Of course it's not a nonsense — that is "what is required". It doesn't matter if you need it or not — you better like it or you'll end up shooting film!We need to cover top plate and back side of the camera with as many buttons as possible, to direct access to everything that comes to fad. A camera doesn't have a direct button for "Instagram cross-process toy filter look no. 16, voted by Kim Kardashian as totally cool"? Nah, pooh, 5 points down. :)

I'ts got a moviebutton. Press mode select release, turn wheel two strokes en then press shutter, and you're on. I think direct moviebutton is a design choice by pentax. When you're into al lot of moviemaking. Get a canon. They are much better at it and there is magic lantern.

If you shoot DSLR video, then not having a dedicated button is a con. But I personally don’t shoot DSLR video, so it’s not a con for me. How should I deal with this paradox? Should I be angry at DPreview for mentioning it? Let’s think about it:

All photographers have different needs. DPreview is trying to address as many of those needs as possible. That means some of the information is not useful to all people. Not all pros are pros for everyone, and not all cons are cons for everyone.

So when reading a review, if a pro or a con doesn't apply to me, then should just IGNORE it and move on. Determining what information is applicable to my needs is my responsibility and not DPreview’s.

The point being here for folks who don't shoot video or that often (ie most of the DSLR users out there) the video button on Sony/Nikon models is just another useless button that can't be configured to do anything else, yet given a prominent place on the camera ergonomics wise. This is a waste IMO and I can't really say relevant to most users, sure mention it but at the top of the cons list?

When shooting professionally you know you are going to shoot many clips. You set your mode dial to movie once and then you shoot away. Great workflow and a dedicated movie button could be even less useful, as it is in a less convenient position

Street/Family Shooting = Lack of movie button could miss shot

In street shooting/family shooting where your default mode is shooting stills, the lack of the movie button could make you miss the shot. If you suddenly see a scene unfolding, you might only have a second to start capturing it. It will take you two to set mode dial to movie mode and then commence shooting. Pentax cameras are squarely aimed at street and family photography. The lack of movie button for this application is indeed surprising. Or at least the capability to assign another button to this function is even more surprising.

Firmware fix: They should offer to assign Movie Button to Green button!

I would like a movie button, I'd use it while shooting/filming wildlife. The green button could be reassigned in a firmware upgrade, as HubertChen points out. But this would not be a deciding factor for me.

I'd rather have manual exposure for video, or at least a way to fix the exposure at the beginning of each clip. For example, a white bird spreading its wings will cause exposure to change, which is quite distracting...

I am using the K-30. I am not sure K5 is the same, but chance are. You have full control over exposure before you press the cord button. You have the equivalent choice of Manual Mode, Aperture Priority and Pentax very nice TAV mode. All modes offer exposure compensation which just can be dialed in accordingly. Metering pattern you can choose from Multi-Segment to Center weighted to spot metering. You would not want to change exposure during recording, as this would cause pumping in the video and is very distracting. What you want to do in your case is to simply choose the proper exposure. Spot metering on the white bird and underexpose -1.5 EV shall do that. Then press the record button. Exposure is locked during recording and no matter your bird is sitting or spreading the wings, it should be correct for the whole duration. Instead would you have auto exposure during recording, exposure would keep changing which would result in pumping ( bad ). I hope this helped ?

I would like to upgrade my ageing Lumix G2, and I'm really hesitating between Nikon d7100 and Pentax K5II/s. UK Amazon body only Pentax K5II £678, K5IIS £849, Nikon d7100 £868 and 35mm prime lens are the same price for Pentax and Nikon.So "moneywise" not much different between Pentax and Nikon. Both have a splash proof body that is quite useful in the UK, altough Pentax body is more compact.I'd use for street, panorama, general photography, and enjoy going out taking pictures. Not for studio, videos or earn money with it. Anyone can help me to decide? I would really appreciate.

I'd look at what lenses you might want to use. It seems like Nikons maintain outstanding resale value, just try to find a D90, D300, etc., but so do Pentax, because there are less extent bodies out there. Some of the older models, K-x, K-7, etc., cost almost as much as the K-5.

I use Nikon - mostly because I have done for years and wanted a camera that worked with my old manual focus Nikkor lenses. However, if I were getting into an APS-C DSLR system from scratch, I wouldn't hesitate to go for a Pentax system over Nikon - especially now they have fixed their AF system.

For what you say you want to use your camera for I think it would be ideal.

Nice to see a Pentax DSLR review after some time. A couple of months ago when I was considering which new DSLR to buy instead of my K-r I had been deciding between the K-5, K-5 II and the K-30. I finally choose the K-30, because the K-5 II as a hot novelty was quite expensive; today I would go for it, as the prices got more reasonable. Anyhow I think this camera is overlooked by many, despite the assessment of dpreview as being one of the best APS-C DSLRs. I have visited Athens last week and (apart from sightseeing) I looked also at cameras other people took pictures with. During 4 days I saw only one (!) Pentax in a sea of Canons and Nikons. Anyhow my K-30 did well in the hot dusty conditions and I am happy with it.

Is it bad not to be in mainstream?I went for Pentax 4 years ago just because competitors offered nothing valuable for such price. And nothing has changed in this aspect since. As for Nikon, I think this vendor(comparing it with Canon) has taken too much interest in marketing than creating user valuable cameras. Even Canon deserves more respect from this point of view.

Interesting you say that because in the US Nikon just ran a full-eight color insert in USA Today in partner with Best Buy, i.e. expensive. I never realized before how strong Nikon marketing is. We're a long ways from Alex Agasse and the Canon AE-1 days.

Is there a chance that you can modify your pages so to remove the problem that without connection to a twitter server your page reload becomes unusable slow ?

I am using Windows 7-64 bit with Chrome. I reproduced the issue on Mac OS with Safari. IE on Windows is also same thing. I live in China with Twitter being blocked. If I use a VPN service your page loads very fast. If I do not use VPN the page loading stalls with Error message "Waiting for Twitter Server".

I understand you want to integrate Twitter. But is it necessary if no Twitter connection that all content does not load ? How about move the timeout for the twitter connection to the end of the page. I do not mind if my Browser keeps trying to connect to twitter after the entire page is loaded and I can start using it.

I apologize to post it here, I searched long and could not find another place to post. If there is, please let me know and I will re-post the question there.

A bit late into the product cycle, a bit patchy (too much recycled material, with at times outdated comparisons, as has been noted by others), but finally we have a full review of these chronically-overlooked cameras! The review seems quite thorough and fair (which is what we've come to expect from dpreview), and confirms my first impressions when I handled these bodies at Photokina and compared them to my K-7 experience. No quantum leap from the classic K-5, but that already was an excellent photographic tool and therefore the Gold Awards are well deserved. And the modest updates also mean that Pentax can sell them at a highly-cempetitive price. How much I'd love to shoot either of the two versions - they'd make my Limiteds shine even more ... "Hey, snap out of it," my inner voice nags. "Grab your trusty K-7, go out, and just take pictures ..."

Thank you very much for the Test. I thoroughly enjoyed the Standout Features Explored Page. Bravo! I hope in the future to find this type of page on other camera tests too!

An interesting Standout Feature of K30 and K5 might have as well:I just bought the K-30, so I am not sure if all applies. But here are my experiences so far:

PDAF speed was impressive for a Pentax and fast enough for almost everything other than sports action.

CDAF. Significantly slower, than PDAF, buy usable for everything other than action. However I found myself shooting in CDAF almost exclusively as a combination of features allows for a very smooth workflow. I am using Liveview with a Viewfinder. After proper programming I can move the AF focus point very fast over the screen where I want it. AE/SEL button is set to Focus. I programmed RAW/Fx button to digital preview. When I want to take a picture, I do not use the shutter but the preview button. I can then explore the preview instantly ...

... I can zoom in etc .. If the shot was good, I can safe it. If no good I just press live view and continue shooting, next try with pressing Fx button, check preview. If good save it.

This method has a bunch of benefits:* Much faster than workflow of shoot, wait save, zoom in, if not good delete, if good keep* Much less movement of the photographer. If you shoot where a photographer causes irritation, I can shoot a series of pictures with no movement of myself dragging attention to the fact that I am shooting* Much smoother workflow. After hours of shooting this method I am still fresh, shooting traditionally with OVF and review with LCD I am exhausted* LCD + LCD viewfinder delivers an amazing viewfinder experience. Very big, depth of field preview* visual focus confirmation is instant and super precise* CDAF is super precise. I shoot 30/f2 open and 50/f2.8 Macro open with very critical focus. CDAF is spot on every single time* Identical shooting style of Stills and Video!

Changing to this shooting style has transformed my photography. It is a very different experience, which can be obtained with the very same camera and investing 15 USD in an LCD viewfinder. Pentax did an amazing job that after configuring the camera to suit this shooting mode photography becomes super fluid and intuitive.

Forgot one more benefit: With long tele lenses, you viewfinder image is stabilized!

I hope this is useful to some and brings more joy to your photography

Same story with different angle: Depending on shooting conditions with my old Pentax, I sometimes longed for the 5D with L-Lenses of my friend. In other conditions I longed for the NEX-5 and its great live view implementation ( which I often borrowed with a NEX to K Adapter). Now with this new shooting method both friends long for my camera setup and are considering to swap system.

Thanks for sharing that work flow. Finally, with the new LiveView and quality LCDs/AMOLED, etc., we can use our digital DSLRs in many ways like view cameras. The ability to move around the focal point is especially useful. I even remember when Phil Askey questioned if anyone would ever need or want LiveView in a digitgal SLR!

Thanks for your reply. You can move the focal point around in the optical viewfinder as well, but the covered area in CDAF with Live view is much bigger. Because I shoot wide open and compose many times the subject more to the border, this is very important to me. Focus and recompose already could cause to miss critical focus in such case

The other thing which really shocked me when using the LCD viewfinder was just the shear size. It took me back when shooting medium format. A very large and very convenient to view viewfinder with a very high eye point is incredible conducive to better pictures!

Wow, everyone's so sensitive about the movie button comment, which we also made about the K-5. If we didn't mention it those wanting one would be upset we didnt mention it. Glad you don't think it's a con. Just because we say it's a con doesn't mean you can't think for yourself and disagree. Or would you rather we qualify every statement with, 'but some might disagree'?

When shooting professionally you know you are going to shoot many clips. You set your mode dial to movie once and then you shoot away. Great workflow and a dedicated movie button could be even less useful, as it is in a less convenient position

Street / Family Shooting = Lack of movie button could miss shot

In street shooting / family shooting where your default mode is shooting stills, the lack of the movie button could make you miss the shot. If you suddenly see a scene unfolding, you might only have a second to start capturing it. It will take you two to set mode dial to movie mode and then commence shooting. Pentax cameras are squarely aimed at street and family photography. The lack of movie button for this application is indeed surprising. Or at least the capability to assign another button to this function is even more surprising.

Firmware fix: They should offer to assign Movie Button to Green button!

I have been shooting with the K5 II for 5 months now in an extreme desert and dust environment and I could not be more delighted with its image quality, durability, and general operation. Perhaps we could learn to cheer Pentax without hurting the delicate feelings of our fellow photogs?

More about gear in this article

Pentax has released firmware updates for its K-5 II, K-5 IIs DSLRs and Q mirrorless cameras. Firmware version 1.04 for the K-5 II and IIs improves overall stability and resolves an issue where some of the controls stopped working on the cameras' status screens. The update Pentax Q firmware v1.12 resolves issues regarding one of its Smart Effect filters. The updates are available for immediate download from the company's website - click through for download links.

Continuing the move toward cameras without optical low-pass filters, Pentax last year released two versions of its flagship digital SLR, the K-5 II and K-5 II S, the latter with no OLPF. Both cameras retain the same body and 16MP resolution, but get an upgraded autofocus sensor and a new air-gapless LCD. We've started our review, but wanted to put up a quick look exploring whether there's a difference between the two in terms of image quality.

Pentax has released firmware updates for its K-5, K-5 II, K-5 IIs, K-30 and K-r digital SLRs. With these latest firmware versions, all cameras gain improved overall stability and enhanced contrast AF performance when using the 560mm f/5.6ED AW lens. The updates are available for immediate download from the company's website - click through for download links.

Pentax has released the first firmware updates to its K-5 II and K-5 IIs digital SLRs, which were released in September of last year. Firmware version 1.01 offers contrast adjustment option for the cameras' LCD displays as well as 'stability improvements'.The updates are available for immediate download from the company's website - click through for download links.

Just Posted: Studio test images from the Pentax K-5 II and its low-pass-filter-free sister model, the K-5 IIs. We've shot studio test samples with Pentax's latest 16MP DSLRs. Not only does this mean you can see the differences between the K-5 II and the 's' variant but it allows you to compare them with the original K-5 or almost every camera we've tested in recent years. It also means you can download the Raw files from either camera to process to your own tastes.

Latest in-depth reviews

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

The Edelkrone DollyONE is an app-controlled, motorized flat surface camera dolly. The FlexTILT Head 2 is a lightweight head that extends, tilts and pans. They aren't cheap, but when combined these two products provide easy camera mounting, re-positioning and movement either for video work or time lapse photography.

Are you searching for the best image quality in the smallest package? Well, the GR III has a modern 24MP APS-C sensor paired with an incredibly sharp lens and fits into a shirt pocket. But it's not without its caveats, so read our full review to get the low-down on Ricoh's powerful new compact.

The Olympus OM-D E-M1X is the ultimate sports, action and wildlife camera for professional Micro Four Thirds users. However, it can't quite match the level of AF reliability offered by its full frame competitors.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

We've updated our waterproof camera buying guide with the latest round of rugged compacts, and we've crowned a new winner as the best pick in the category: the Olympus TG-6. That is, unless you happen to find a good deal on the TG-5.

Researchers with the Samsung AI Center in Moscow and the Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology have created a system that transforms still images into talking portraits with as little as a single image.

K&R Photographics, a camera store in Crescent Springs, Kentucky, was robbed by armed men, who not only took thousands of dollars worth of camera equipment, but also injured the 70-year-old co-owner of the store.

The new Fujifilm GFX 100 boasts some impressive specifications, including 100MP, in-body stabilization and 4K video. But what's it like to shoot with? Senior Editor Barnaby Britton found out on a recent trip to Florence, Italy.

It's here! The long-awaited next-generation Fujifilm GFX has been officially launched. Click through to learn more about the camera that Fujifilm is hoping will shake up the pro photography market - the GFX100.

We've known about the Fujifilm GFX 100 since last fall, but now it's official: this 102MP medium-format monster will be available at the end of June for $10,000. In addition to its incredible resolution, the camera also has in-body IS, a hybrid AF system, 4K video and a removable EVF.

According to DJI, any drone model weighing over 250 grams will have AirSense Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers installed to help drone operators know when planes and helicopters are nearby.

Chris and Jordan are kicking off a new segment in which they make feature suggestions to manufacturers for the benefit of all photographer-kind. To start things off, they take a look at the humble USB-C port and everything it could be doing for us.

The Olympus TG-5 is one of our favorite waterproof cameras, and the company today introduced the TG-6, a relatively low-key update. New features include the addition of an anti-reflective coating on the sensor, a higher-res LCD, and more underwater and macro modes.

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

We've been playing around with a prototype of the new Peak Design Travel Tripod and are impressed so far: it's incredibly compact, fast to deploy and stable enough for the heaviest bodies. However, the price may turn some away.